Comments

BSDKcebu, Kasparov is the greatest ever period, put your political predjudice aside. Mulaton, Yes you can claim Carlsen is better, his ELO is higher, he was consistently better from an earlier age. I sense some serious anti-white, anti-West sentiment in some of the comments.

The Candidates are certainly going to be tough, it's 50 years since the last round robin Candidates, and then 0.5 point separated the top three. Whoever had won would probably have beaten the 52-year-old Botvinnik. Fischer was three points from third place, but I'd still have expected him to win just as easily as Petrosian did in the match. Maybe it's something similar this time, and I'd have most of the participants in London as favourites against Anand. Except Gelfand, but I think he will finish last. Carlsen's winning chances should be below 50%, maybe it's something like: Carlsen 30%, Aronian 25%, Kramnik 15%, Radjabov 10%, Ivanchuk 10%, Grischuk 5%, Svidler 4%, Gelfand 1%.

While Smyslov and Korchnoi were quite old, they are also among the greatest chess players to ever live, one having a 18-19 w-l record in his 3 World Championship matches (Smyslov) and the other having challenged for the title twice and playing his eighth candidates match.

"the format for the cadidates tournament is different than regular tournament play. It's match-based. Magnus Carlsen is among the best when it comes to regular tournament play. But matches require a different mindset. Anand not only had to win the WC title by defeating Kramnik in a match, he successfully defended it twice"

The format was a knockout but is now a double round robin, the same format in which Anand won the title he defended against Kramnik. As for minimatches as qualifiers I don't think they are good for much else than seeing to it that the best players don't reach the title match. When Kasimdzhanov won in 2004 he wasn't even top 50, and also Khalifman and Gelfand never won a top event with another format. It's just very unpredictable with all the blitz tiebreaks, and the draw that ensures that some players avoid the top ranked opponents.

The Candidates being a double round robin definitely doesn't make it certain that Carlsen will succeed. Even if he usually wins the strongest tournaments he doesn't win every time, and the Candidates could well be one of those events where some other player does better. I think winning the Candidates will be more difficult than winning the title match. Kramnik failed in the Candidates but was given a title match anyway, and Anand won the title in a tournament in 2007.

The last player to win a Candidates event in the cycle where he won the title was Kasparov. That was 30 years ago, and he faced Korchnoi and Smyslov (over 115 years old together) in the final Candidates matches. So winning Candidates plus title after playing several opponents ranked in the top five like Aronian, Kramnik, Radjabov etc isn't easy and hasn't been done in many decades, so Carlsen's chances shouldn't be overestimated in spite of his being the best player in the world the last years.

Elubus- I suppose you're right. And Carlsen did receive some coaching from Kasparov a year or two ago. For me, that was a sign that Carlsen was gunning for WC Champ. Even there were drastic differences between match and tournament play, having Kasparov's insight would definitely pay off for approaching match play (after, Kasparov has had some of the most memorable matches in chess history).

Maybe I'm just reluctant to embrace change. But I don't expect Anand to roll over, especially after this last match. I feel that he's going to face the next challenger with better preparation to make up for those questionnable moments in the Gelfand match.

gxtmfa, I think you are overestimating the difference between regular play and match play; it shouldn't be used as an infallible excuse, disregarding even the largest differences in rating (I'm mostly referring to how much higher rated Carlsen is than Anand). I get that the two things are different, but come on, chess is chess. Carlsen has for years been able to get more consistently good results than Anand, and I just don't think that the difference between regular and match play can make up for that; it probably doesn't change the fact that Carlsen probably makes better moves, on average, than Anand throughout his games.

Maybe I'm ignorant about match play -- it's not like I'm an expert on it -- but I think it's enough that I simply have been watching a lot of big matches such as the WCC for the past few years. A lot of it is chess skill, a chunk of it is strong preparation, but all in all, I think Carlsen, if he was in Anand's position, with confidence in his chess ability, should be able to rise to the "challenge" of match play. It's not so much a challenge as it is an adjustment of routines (tournament play to match play).

Anand is one of the greatest of all time, but time has caught up with him. Now in his 40's, his peak has come and gone. Carlsen is half Anand's age, hasn't begun to reach his peak, and already has a rating considerably higher than Anand's (Anand's currently being in decline) at the Super Grandmaster level. Not only that, does anyone really believe that if Carlsen were to play a 12 game match today with Gelfand (another player in his 40's) that it would have to go into overtime for Carlsen to win? Carlsen will be the next World Chess Champion.

I see Magnus won't become a world champion.. the facts are fighting against the myths.. it's just a feeling. He's too moody more than Bobby Fischer. I still have my banks on Anand, i think Anand is the greatest.. Kasparov? wow the guy is crazy potician.

I'll reiterate despite redundancy: the format for the cadidates tournament is different than regular tournament play. It's match-based. Magnus Carlsen is among the best when it comes to regular tournament play. But matches require a different mindset. Anand not only had to win the WC title by defeating Kramnik in a match, he successfully defended it twice. nand might not shine as much in regukar tournament play, but he is very powerful in matches. Each have their own strengths and weaknesses. In a regular tournament, I'd put my money on Carlsen. In accelerated time controls and extended matches, I'd put my money on Anand.

It's becoming a habit for Carlsen in the Tal Memorial, he won with black in the last round also in his two previous starts, against Nakamura when he won in 2011 and against Leko when he finished in second place in 2009, as with McShane the only times he has beaten these opponents with black.

"Stop doing the chess media hype while stroking his ego and return him to nomal as a human being. He plays good chess but until he captures the world chess title and wins the candidates match to represent "he has nothing to write home about.""

Every time Carlsen scores another great result people keep repeating that he is lucky, overrated, hyped, and has "nothing to write home about".

Help us finish translating:

We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!